How bad are hunts for conservation?

Jordi Casamitjana - Head of Policy & Research

Hunting and conservation - it is a matter of common sense

Killing wild animals inhumanely is not good for wildlife. You cannot conserve natural ecosystems if you are negatively affecting the native wildlife in them. You cannot expect a pack of hunting hounds to understand that they have to be careful with vegetation, animals and soil when they enter a protected area. You cannot expect a protected area to not be disturbed by the presence of an active foxhunt, stag hunt, mink hunt or hare hunt, which are not only composed of packs of dogs often let out of control, but also by many people following them on foot, horse, quad bike or other vehicles.

But in case common sense has abandoned some people, possibly chased away by the relentless hunting fraternity propaganda aiming to make them forget that what hunts do is simply a blood sport done for fun, I thought that it may be useful to produce an evidence based report to asses the conservation implications of hunting since the hunting ban was enacted. So, in 2017 I did, and it is titled “The Conservation Problems of Hunting with Dogs during the Hunting Ban in England and Wales".

With the Hunting Act 2004, hunting wild mammals with dogs was banned in England and Wales. However, some types of hunting with dogs, known as “exempt hunting”, are still allowed providing several conditions are met. In addition, those registered hunts that were hunting foxes, deer, hares and mink prior to the ban did not disband but instead invented other types of hunting with the intention of circumventing the ban (e.g. “trail hunting”, which should not be confused with drag hunting that existed before 2004).

Most wild animals that were hunted before the ban are native to the British Isles, and so their preservation should be considered an important part of conservation work in England and Wales. The Hunting Act 2004 should therefore have had a positive impact in preserving them. However, the hunting ban did not stop registered hunts going into the countryside as they took a defiant attitude and tried to continue hunting in any way they could, often illegally.

The report identifies four main activities now undertaken by registered hunts that can have negative conservation implications:

The use of “trail hunting” as a form of simulated hunting where the hounds are set to follow a trail of an animal-based artificial scent (often fox urine) in areas where wild animals live, without those controlling them knowing where the trail has been laid.

The use of “exempt hunting” as an excuse to continue hunting wild mammals, pretending to be controlling wildlife, doing research or rescuing animals, thereby abusing several of the exemptions of the Schedule of the Hunting Act 2004 for which they were not created.

Claiming to be “exercising their hounds” in areas far away from their kennels in pre-arranged meetings where hunt supporters turn out as they always have done to observe actual hunting.

Illegally hunting either blatantly or under the cover of the other activities mentioned above.

The report also shows, with particular examples, that these activities are causing the following disturbances that can have negative implications for conservation:

Disturbance to habitats by packs of hounds on the loose, riders or vehicles entering protected areas and potentially doing physical damage to the vegetation, soil or wildlife.

Disturbance to animals belonging to protected or endangered species, or otherwise, by interfering with their shelters, disturbing their natural activities, injuring them or even killing them.

Disturbance to the environment by spreading contaminated dog faeces all over the countryside, and potentially biologically polluting the environment by spreading animal by-products such as fox urine (which is what hunts claim they use for “trail hunting”) that may be unsafe or illegally imported or produced.

Disturbance to historical sites by potentially damaging soil or structures when trespassing.

What can be done to solve this? Firstly, strengthening the Hunting Act 2004 to better facilitate enforcement, and both prevent “trail hunting” from being used as a defence against allegations of illegal hunting and stop the Act’s exemptions being abused. Secondly, major landowners could stop licensing registered hunts for “trail hunting”, exempt hunting or exercising hounds on their land, or simply ban hunts from their land, to mitigate the negative conservation problems caused by hunting.

‘Conservation’ and ‘hunting with hounds’ are concepts that do not go together, despite what the hunts claim. If you doubt it, then please read the report.

A call for the National Trust to stop allowing hunts on its land, amid concerns that animals are still being chased and killed under the guide of 'trail' hunting, will be heard at more than 20 sites nationwide.

Most read

As a team, we share the same passion – to stop animal cruelty in the name of sport. We are a tight knit team and we work hard within a fun, relaxed environment. We also offer something many employers don’t – an office full of friendly dogs!

Hunting was banned in England and Wales in 2004, but the law has never been properly enforced, and attempts to weaken or repeal it continue. The hunting law in Scotland is weak, and hunting is still legal in Northern Ireland.

Hurting and killing animals for ‘sport’ is one of the principal causes of animal cruelty in the UK: tens of millions suffer and die each year for ‘leisure’ activities. We’re here to protect those animals.

The Hunting Act 2004 is the law which bans chasing wild mammals with dogs in England and Wales – this basically means that fox hunting, deer hunting, hare hunting, hare coursing and mink hunting are all illegal, as they all are cruel sports based on dogs chasing wild mammals.

Bullfighting is perhaps the most well known spectator “sport” involving the killing of animals for entertainment. It has already been banned in most countries, but each year tens of thousands of bulls are maimed, tortured and killed for entertainment in Spain, Portugal, France, Colombia, Mexico, USA, Venezuela, Ecuador and Peru.

The hidden side of greyhound racing includes dogs kept for long periods in lonely kennels, painful injuries from racing and training, illness and neglect. Shockingly, thousands of surplus dogs die or disappear every year. The League believes dogs should not suffer or die for entertainment or for the profit of the dog racing industry.